King v. United States of America

Filing 15

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on January 8, 2018. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/8/2018) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/8/2018: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (igS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

LEBARON KING,

Case No. 17-cv-06709-DMR

Plaintiff,
9
v.
10
11

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendant.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT
PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE
Re: Dkt. No. 14

12
On October 17, 2017, Plaintiff LeBaron King (“Mr. King”) filed a Claim and Order to Go

13
14

to Small Claims Court in San Francisco Superior Court, against Defendant Stephanie Lee, an

15

employee of the United States Mint, alleging that Ms. Lee had made false statements about him to

16

his co-workers. See Ex. A to Not. of Removal [Docket No. 1-2]. Defendant United States of

17

America (“Defendant”), substituted as Defendant for Ms. Lee, removed the action to this court on

18

November 21, 2017. See Not. of Removal [Docket No. 1].
On November 28, 2017, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss. [Docket No. 8]. Pursuant

19
20

to Civil Local Rule 7-3(a), Mr. King was required to file an opposition brief by December 12,

21

2017. See Civ. L.R. 7-3(a). No opposition was filed.
Accordingly, on December 20, 2017, the court issued an Order to Show Cause, instructing

22
23

Mr. King to submit a written statement by no later than January 2, 2018 explaining his failure to

24

respond to the motion. [Docket No. 14.] The Order to Show Cause stated that failure to respond

25

by January 2, 2018 may result in dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute.

26

//

27

//

28

//

dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

6

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

______________________________________
Donna M. Ryu
United States Magistrate u
. Ry Judge

aM

NO

7

Dated: January 8, 2018

RT

8

onn
Judge D

ER

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

A

H

9

R NIA

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT
ED

4

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

3

FO

2

Mr. King did not respond to the Order to Show Cause. Accordingly, this matter is hereby

LI

1

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C